So you are saying that white girl on the street after a certain time deserves to get raped.

I think he cleared that up in response to my post.
However, I still can't accept that only white girls are out and about at night.

That's because when it's dark it's hard to spot them in their black burkas.

Several facts an links have been provided on this thread by myself and other users. Not one shred of evidence to support your theory though.
Recent reports suggest Poland alone have taken £5bn from the uk in recent years. If you can find evidence to support your theory that the polish migrants have provided more than this back to the economy then let me know.

You need to learn to use Google:

2 seconds of searching reveealed this as the first search rresult:

Migrants give boost to public finances

I thought you might like this little gem:

Even Migrant Watch (an outfit trying to stop immigration) admit there is a net financial gain LOL!

You should try Google in future, it works well. Unless you are running Google Bigot Edition of course ;)

Can you hear that sound like running water? It's reality p1ssing on your chips!

Probably not. My Asian friends won't let their 14 yo daughter out after 8pm unless she is supervised Good idea in my book!

Ignore mrmadcap, he's either thick or a sh1t stirrer or sadly misguided ;)

Well I ainl't going out cruising at midmight to find out, but just ask any Asian people you know ... would they let their kids out at night on their own?... I think you'll find the answer is no!

Young people should be able to walk out at anytime without fear of rape. The fact that some of them may come from broken backgrounds is no reason or excuse for them to be considered easy prey by other cultures.

It's just hypocritical, but isn't that just typical of other cultures or minority groups that sit in constant judgement of others.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-22802667

Of about 260,000 suspects arrested in London each year, 70,000 are foreign nationals - about 28%, the Met said.

published today....

Conveniently left this out from the same article....

"Others remain unconvinced by claims that mass migration has been a net gain to the native population. Some experts argue that GDP is too crude a measurement because it is inevitably boosted by hundreds of thousands of yearly arrivals but does not account for the cost they impose on public services and housing."

:iamwithst

Odd as well, you seem to think I believe what I read in the media, yet back your argument up with the FT :lol1:.

What has that to do with this thread? But anyway I thought 50% or thereabouts of London's population were immigrants or immigrant background so why are those figures so surprising?

Oh the f**king irony :lol1::lol1::lol1:

Sorry another fact that doesn't effect you, so you are choosing to ignore it.

How about adding up 28% of what it costs per year to run the met, and minus that from any gain.

Oh for pity's sake you ask for a link... where do you think it's going to come from? The moon???? Big difference between an article relating the facts of a report and some load of right wing garbage piece of sh1t conjecture based racist propaganda in the Daily Mail or its scum laden ilk! :Whatever_

If 28% of the arrests are foreign nationals how many live here and how many are visiting. Even if they all live here then with London at 50% immigrant ratio it means that 72% of the arrests must have been homegrown suspects meaning that if immigration didn't exist instead of 260K arrests there would have been 380K, a rise of 120K..... putting a bigger strain on resources. Best get rid of the whites and bring in the immigrants...there would only be 140K arrests then. Much better :thumb:

BTW I am aware that the non foreign nationals are made up of some people of immigrant background, but I am just showing you how your figures are........ well malleable is a good word! :thumb:

Just as the FT "evidence" that says in it's own article the information is inaccurate :lol1:. It's almost as hypocritical as saying someone cannot spell, then making a spelling mistake.
The information is shaky on both sides, depending on what side of the fence the article your reading is sitting on, or their owner wants to express.

Nobody will be able to give an accurate figure on what money leaves the UK undeclared, nor will it take into account any money obtained using student Visa's or anyone illegal (IE Cash in Hand). It will also not take into account that a Polish person being here working in a skilled job, deservedly or not puts a UK resident on the dole which then costs the taxpayer. There are so many costs that more than likely not taken into account against only one on the opposite side, income that foreign nationals earn (then take home anyway).

Hang on a sec, only a few posts ago you were touting your figures as the reason you believe what you believe, now you say they are dodgy so why do you feel the way you do? BTW the figures in he FT article report are real, the interpretation is the issue, the fgures in your article are basically inaccurate and unscientific! There's a big difference!

Just as nobody can give an accurate figure on the total amount of cash in hand work being done across the UK or the total amount of benefit fraud etc. etc.

At the end of the day it isn't just about finances anyway. Imimgrants have brought a lot to the country. Personally I'd rather have moist of them than the scum on that lovely Skint documentary, but if you'd rather have those sort of people in the country than any immigrants so be it... it's your opinion and you're entitled to it :thumb:

Finally you quioted my analysis of the foreign national arrests in Lonodon yet made no reference to it... odd that ;)

Just put your head back into that sand.

Only when you take yours out of your ar5e!

I believe what I see and hear for myself. I think you'll find I stated on the first page of this thread "If these figures are accurate". If they are they back up my opinion, I didn't base my opinion on what the media tells me.


I'm not sure why you'd want moist immigrants but each to their own. 99% of the population would want a reform on benefits and reason's to claim. In the same respect how many immigrants are on benefits but choose not to be filmed for a sensationalist documentary?.


First of all foreign national means they were not born here. So anyone descended from anywhere other than the UK, but born here are in that 72% of nationals. So that's not 72% of "white british"
Try again....

I thought this thread was about the edl pedo ?

Yes, as I said in that post:

Not try again, but try reading the whole post. :lol1:

Nah, no such thing as a white paedophile as well you know ;)

It seems the only logical conclusion to make going by some of the comments on this thread, is that all immigration and for that matter free travel should in fact be banned and nobody should be able to travel out of their country of birth. Ideally, anyone even born within a country that is not their parents or grandparents, should be sent back too. :cuckoo::rolleyes:

Seriously, are people suggesting that all immigration is bad? Of course some immigrants or visitors will commit crimes, but that's life, some people are bad, most are not.

A question to those advocating shutting our borders entirely or seeing all immigration as negative. Would you be happy for us to be prevented from travelling elsewhere, be it to live/work or just to go on holiday? How many times do we see on TV, Brits causing hassle abroad? Mainly on holiday or travelling to sporting events, but nevertheless, they cause problems and create extra strain on the resources in those countries. We have quite a bad reputation abroad, but yet we are still freely allowed to travel. We don't have a situation where countries that have suffered with problem Brits, shutting the doors to all of us as a response. And rightly so. No doubt someone will come along and say we pump a lot of money into foreign economies, I bet those people don't know the actual stats. Perhaps the reason they still put up with us, is because the majority aren't a problem and do help economies, which I imagine is just as much the case in our country.

You may think I'm being ridiculous, but no more so than some of the previous comments that have been.

There are problems in this country that need to be addressed, and we shouldn't be afraid to tackle difficult subjects for fear of being labelled racist, but if we don't want that label, then we need to tackle issues from all social angles, not just shout 'kick them all out, as if all are responsible for the actions of some bad apples'. I'm all for sensible controls on immigration, but I will never support banning it altogether.

Oi, you're female you're not allowed an opinion.:p

I'm not having a go but this is what people are afraid of. Over exaggerating, mis-reading and mis-interpretting things said. I quite clearly said anyone born in the UK should be considered British, and nobody should be deported. I quite clearly stated that not all immigration was bad, but until we have an as close to perfect as possible system to eradicate as many criminals as possible then we should stop just letting anyone in.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereport..._about_im.html
The survey above would suggest 59% of Brits think there are "too many immigrants". Whether you believe that or not is up to you. But if it is true, does that mean most of Britain are racist, want immigrants "booted out" or want the EDL in power?. I highly doubt it. I'd imagine they want tighter controls and better, more reliable figures to give a more accurate picture of what immigration does for or to the UK, which is what I've said.

As for Brits abroad? Who are we talking about here? Middle class, aristocracy or the working class?. I'd imagine its the down-trodden, oppressed and frustrated working class man going out having too many beers?

Completely unworkable! Crime will never be eradicated whether home grown or migrants and there will never be perfect system. You may as well say we should ban people from driving because people break the law by speeding, drink drive and causing fatalities until we have a perfect system to eradicate offending drivers.

This really is a pointless discussion tbh, sort one problem out then somebody else does it and so on, you will never solve crime as said above, crime has got worse over the years, before it was bits and bobs, now it's everything more than was back in the day, and let me say, crimes will only get worse as life goes on, new crimes will be in force as the future moves on, that's the some of it IMO.
It really is pointless pulling your hair out over it, get on with your own life's and enjoy it, if you see a crime being committed then do the right thing and report or stop it, we can't do anymore than that!

Ban everyone!

Please point to where I said crime would be eradicated and the system perfect?.